My understanding is that it depends on context. Have you been sweating a lot? Are you super dehydrated? Sports drinks (actual “sports drinks” like Gatorade) are probably better for you than water.

The reason for that is because you lose a lot of salt and other electrolytes through sweat, and drinks like Gatorade are meant to replace those. That’s why professional athletes, especially stamina-based athletes like marathon runners, football players, etc, tend to drink some form of sports drink (the sponsorships help though). Additionally, if you’re extremely dehydrated then you may also be low on electrolytes (because you’ve been out in the sun, or you’ve been sweating a lot). I’ve also heard that sports drinks hydrate faster because they’re supposedly similar to saline, but I can’t find any sources for that, so take that with a grain of salt.

However, if you’re just kinda thirsty or want something to drink, then water is probably better. I doubt you’ll hurt yourself drinking Gatorade instead of water, but you don’t need it either.

Imo, we should have one, or at most, two Olympic states. They’d be small countries that are more-or-less politically neutral, and instead of sending teams, their purpose would be to host the Summer and/or Winter Olympics. Construction, maintenance and upgrades of the facilities would be paid for by participating countries, as a percentage of their GDP. That way, the hosting country(ies) wouldn’t have to spend billions building the facilities, they get guaranteed tourism every 2~4 years, the facilities get reused, non-hosting countries have a place to measure their penis size, don’t have to spend outrageous sums to build their own facilities (they’re all paying together, after all), don’t have to bulldoze houses or forests, be concerned with water quality, and probably many other bonuses I’m not thinking of.

Bonus points if the facilities are open year-round for Olympians to train at, so that the athletes are more used to the climate, equipment, tracks, trails, etc.

The biggest downside is that hosting the Olympics is prestigious itself and generates a lot of tourism revenue (which in this case, would only be going to the “static” host(s)). It’s a chance for the host country to show off their economic strength, culture (like during the opening ceremonies), and more. You’d have to convince countries that they’re better off without the tourism and chance to flaunt their wealth.

I’d assume they’d be required to pay taxes once they’re old enough to, but I’d be willing to bet that most of them don’t unless they plan to ever actually move to the US.

I wonder how often the IRS actually goes after American citizens who don’t live in the US, especially ones that haven’t traveled to the US in more than 5+ years.

Edit: they might also be completely unaware that they need to pay taxes. If I’m not mistaken, the US is literally the only country in the world that requires you to pay taxes when living abroad. Logically speaking, it makes sense that you wouldn’t have to pay taxes to a country you don’t live in.

That’s fucking dumb. How long ago was that? The antidepressants thing is particularly upsetting. We shouldn’t be turning people away if they’ve ever been on antidepressants (or are currently on antidepressants); I mean, it’s not like we get free government healthcare or anything. I’m sorry you had to deal with that. That sucks.

I don’t drink and that sounds amazing.

Edit: in case anyone’s curious, I’m don’t tend to drink because I don’t really like the taste of alcohol, and cocktails are too tasty. I need something that tastes good, but not so good that I feel tempted to become an alcoholic. I’d bet that the French toast brew is tasty enough for me to enjoy the flavor, but not so tasty that I’d want to drink it every day. That said, I have had people tell me, “oh this beer is amazing you have to try it” and then it tastes like shit, so it who knows.

Probably icbm tech or something, it’s pretty much all they have left.

This. If I’m not mistaken, the system was meant to operate like a hybrid between patents and trademarks. Iirc, things weren’t originally under copyright by default and you had to regularly renew your copyright in order to keep it. Most of the media in the public domain is a result of companies failing to properly claim or renew copyright before the laws were changed. My understanding is that the reason for this was because the intent was to protect you from having your IP stolen while it was profitable to you, but then release said IP into the public domain once it was no longer profitable (aka wasn’t worth renewing copyright on).

Then corpos spent a lot of money rewriting the system and now practically everything even remotely creative is under copyright that’s effectively indefinite.

The 6-3 ruling penned by Trump appointee Amy Coney Barrett in Department of State v. Muñoz held that a citizen has no “fundamental liberty interest in her noncitizen spouse being admitted to the country,” denying a couple’s plea after a U.S. citizen’s husband was denied a visa.

Hold the fuck up, I thought visas were basically guaranteed to those married to US citizens. This seems like a pretty big deal, so why haven’t I heard more about it?

Like father, like son.

Not flesh, nor fish nor bone,

A red rag hangs from an open mouth.

Alive at both ends but a little dead in the middle…

I like Not Deer. Weird Birds are in a similar vein. I doubt they’re established well enough to be considered a cryptid, but they’re kinda similar.

Dude, what the fuck? You’re being an asshole. Be better, I know you’re capable of it.

This comment section gonna be spicy~

Tbh I kinda agree with you, calling someone a murderer or rapist for eating meat is overboard; however the biggest issue I have is the pretentious and self-righteous attitude that vegans have. Like, cool, you don’t eat meat, good for you! I agree that commercially raised farm animals are often abused, and that even animals raised by small, private farms don’t always get to lead their best lives.^1 At the same time though, you’re not making your cause look good.

Yes, I might honestly be a better person if I stop eating meat, dairy and buying any form of animal product; but I’m also gonna be associated with assholes with overinflated egos. I’m distanced enough from the slaughter that the overinflated ego is more of a turnoff than the slaughtering of animals.

Is that how it should be? No, but that’s how humans usually work. The object perceived to be closer is a higher priority than the object perceived to be further away. Animal slaughter is perceived as being further away than being associated with assholes, so the fear of being associated with assholes is a greater “threat” than the inhumane treatment of animals.

Be a vegan if you want, or don’t. You’re honestly probably a better, healthier person if you’re vegan (though you probably have your head up your ass about it), because your diet and spending habits are less likely to contribute to climate change, animal cruelty, and because you have to be conscious about what you eat, your food is likely healthier.

Just… Don’t be an ass about it, dude.

Instead of accusing people of being “carnists”, talk about a good (totally-not-vegan) dish you had recently. Instead of accusing people of murder, talk about the pros and cons of real leather vs faux leather.^2 Instead of telling people they’re animal rapists, talk about new sources of cow’s milk.

I swear I recently read about a technically vegan blue cheese that won and then got disqualified from a cheese competition because the milk it was made from was technically synthetic cow’s milk that had been derived from fungi or something. Talk about that shit. That is pretty fucking cool. Fungus milk that’s virtually identical to cow’s milk? That’s awesome!

Meat eating and the damage it causes is far off in most people’s rear-view mirrors, and many people don’t know or don’t have time to find ways of getting off the meat highway. They don’t know about alternatives or up-and-coming technologies related to meat substitutes. Being an ass is only going to turn people away; if you really care, then you’ll understand that you have to take people’s hands and take baby steps with them. And no, you can’t get angry when they mess up. You’re helping a baby to walk, if you get angry then they’ll just get angry, demoralized, frustrated with you or themselves, or something else, and you risk them giving up. If you actually care though, then you don’t want them to give up, and that means you have to grit your teeth and bear it when they complain about how something sucks or admit they have a “guilty pleasure” like dairy ice cream.

Some additional notes:

^1 imo meat should only be harvested from animals that have died from age-related causes. “But the meat will be too tough!” Yeah? Hispanic people figured out how to deal with that a long time ago. Make fajitas! I still eat meat anyway though, despite knowing they’re slaughtered and don’t die of old age.

^2 when it comes to leather, my experience is that natural leather lasts a lot longer than faux leather, and faux leather tends to use plastics. Additionally, I’ve heard that while “leather is a byproduct of the meat industry” is mostly a myth, it’s my understanding that there are “ethical” ways of getting leather, e.g. by taking cast-offs that’d normally be trashed, leather harvested from animals that have died from old age; you just have to be very conscious about where you’re buying leather from. I’d be curious if anyone knows about any non-petroleum-based faux or lab-grown leathers. I mean, it’s literally just skin, how hard can it really be to grow that in a lab?

Republicans cutting funding to NASA because rockets are “satanic devil worship” and “are arousing to females (biological) and homosexual men because they’re phallic in nature” in T-minus 10…

(Spoiler: they were gonna defund NASA anyway)

Edit: also, just a reminder that space and space accessories actually make a lot of money for the US and push technological progress, which is why American politicians don’t like NASA; it’s a successful and profitable government program.

In a written statement, the ADL said the decision by Wikipedia was the result of a ”campaign to delegitimize the ADL” and that editors opposing the ban “provided point by point refutations, grounded in factual citations, to every claim made, but apparently facts no longer matter.”

You of all groups should know that the last part of your statement is a common right-wing dog whistle that gets used when someone doubles down after their “facts” get rejected for bigotry and/or inaccuracy. By using that phrase, you’ve automatically cast doubt on the legitimacy of your actions and statements. At best you’re ignorant of a common dog whistle, which is embarrassing for an organization who should be well-versed in this kind of thing; at worst you’ve signaled to everyone that you’re potentially peddling “alternative facts”, which casts doubt on everything you’ve done in the past. Either way, you’re ultimately hurting the Jewish people by making that kind of statement.

Mira Sucharov, a professor of political science at Carleton University, said Wikipedia’s decision represents a major opportunity to reflect on why the ADL is facing scrutiny and rethink communal approaches for fighting antisemitism.

“This is a sign that the Jewish community needs better institutions,” she said.

They really do, and I feel bad for them. The places that should be defending them seem more than happy to ignore them or even throw them under the bus in the name of Zionism.

Like, okay, personal beliefs on Zionism aside, if your organization is tasked with defending a group of people, you should ensure your actions aren’t going to endanger, delegitimize or otherwise encourage bigotry against said group. That means that even if you’re a Zionist Jewish organization, if your task is to fight against bigotry towards Jews, you shouldn’t be ignoring non-Zionist Jews nor should you be dismissing their views. Instead, you should be listening to what they have to say, condensing it and releasing it in an manner easy for non-jews to understand (which means providing political, historical and religious context, because many people, myself included, don’t understand as much as they think they do about Judaism).

In the current context, you should be giving people statements from Zionist and non-Zionist Jews about Palestine, and attempt to include non-biased historical, religious and political backgrounds for events that are occurring.

I think ethnically Jewish people could make an honest argument that they should have some portion of Palestine based on historical origins (I think it’s a weak arguement, but I think you could argue for it). However, that doesn’t excuse the way that the IDF and Israeli government have treated Gaza and the West Bank.

You can criticize the Israeli government while also believing that ethnically Jewish people should be able to have a country they have control over. Other countries do this all the time (get criticized for poor treatment of the “outside” ethnic group(s)), why is this somehow different for Israel? Why aren’t we allowed to criticize Israel? I can talk about how France, a white, French ethnostate, is mistreating Muslims without being a racist bigot; I should be able to talk about Israel the same way.

My biggest complaint about Sims-likes is that the visual style always looks too serious. It gives me the feeling that whatever I’m going to do with my not-Sims, it’s gonna be something that makes me regret my real life.

You wanna know what I did the last time I played the Sims 2 though? I repeatedly held parties at my Sim’s house and then lured the guests into a room they couldn’t get out of. I also used the moveobjects cheat to collect police cars whenever a cop showed up to shut the party down. By the time I was done I had amassed around 70 urns, many hysterical immortal Sims (Sims with households can’t die while visiting someone’s house in the Sims 2), 4 Police cars and a fire truck.

The Sims has a mischievous air to it that tickles the devil on your shoulder and begs you to listen to them. None of the Sims-likes I’m aware of seem to have the same air.

Edit: now I want to play the Sims again.

'member when conspiracies were relatively harmless like flat earthers and ufologists?

'member when the main source of Christian extremism (in the US) was the Westboro Baptist Church, and most people just laughed at them because no one really took them seriously?

What the fuck happened?

I’m actually very confused because the US 10yrs ago was radically different than the US now. How did everyone completely lose their minds? This is a semi-rhetorical question because I’m aware of some of the contributing factors, it’s just… I feel like somewhere in the past 10-15yrs I slipped sideways into some kind of an alternate reality.

The most extreme Christians I knew didn’t approve of homosexuality, but also weren’t yelling “god hates f*gs” at people for being gay. They believed in a 7-day creation, but didn’t lose their minds and thirst for blood at the sight of Charles Darwin’s Theory of Evolution.

The worst racists I’d met believed in white supremacy, but weren’t cruising around looking for POC to lynch (with the exception of cops, that is). They hated Hispanic people, but mostly kept it to themselves.

Maybe I was just really sheltered, but while it seems like our level of tolerance has grown, the extremes have gotten worse. Like, the graph of tolerance is still going up, but the data point distribution is getting worse.

Edit: to put it another way, my experience growing up in Texas’ suburbs was that people were “tolerant” in a “I don’t like you but I won’t bother you so long as you don’t bother me” kinda way. Not ideal, but not terrible either. Now though, it’s more “I don’t like you and that bothers me, so I’m gonna bother you”.

I think you’re thinking of Slayers X: Terminal Aftermath: Vengance of the Slayer, which is not a shitpost but the greatest fps game ever made, you turd!

(It’s a spinoff of Hypnospace Outlaw, which I highly recommend, especially if you’re old enough to remember the internet pre-y2k because it’s basically a very high quality pre-y2k Internet simulator. Also it doesn’t use the same “S” but it is a parallel-universe version of it).

Honestly kinda sad I missed the “golden years” of MTV. I didn’t grow up with cable or satellite TV; so my sister and I would watch the shit out of Nickelodeon, cartoon network, discovery and animal planet when we were on vacation or at our grandparents house. However, I grew up with my parents waxing poetic about how MTV used to have the best music and they would have (supposedly) gotten a cable or satellite connection if only MTV still showed music videos.

Looking back it was obvious bullshit and they wouldn’t have gotten a subscription even if MTV only played their favorite bands and music videos; but at the time it meant I was always hoping MTV would start showing music videos again so my parents would get cable and my sister and I could watch cartoons, science, nature, history and engineering shows.

For some reason I enjoy intentionally mangling people’s names to make them sound silly. If I were to use my name as an example, I’d probably turn it into “modsy” or “mobsy”. Haven’t run into anyone yet who’s told me to cut it out, so it’s kinda turned into a game to see how hard I can mangle a name and still be understandable.

Edit: mosdy, mosby, mobdsy, moldy, moffy, mothy, mawshy, etc

The sea is literally right there. C’mon.