![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/d82718c7-5579-4676-8e2e-97b4188f10d3.png)
And there’s almost no muscle on that chest. Even if there were, there’s no muscle that can get that thick on the bottom ribs (the serratus for instance is quite flush with your rib cage)
And there’s almost no muscle on that chest. Even if there were, there’s no muscle that can get that thick on the bottom ribs (the serratus for instance is quite flush with your rib cage)
No, shareholder interest, which - in the absence of the clear desire of the majority shareholder(s) - is assumed to be profit. So I think the question above is quite important actually
The Internationale begins playing in the background
Maybe I’m being overly generous here, to me the user just sounded frustrated with the boundaries of civil discourse masking but not solving a problem. I assumed the problem was self-evident/they weren’t denying it.
To me that feels like a call for more action, not less. It’s all too easy to pretend something isn’t happening when the verbiage around it becomes more palatable (exactly what dog whistles are for).
But again, maybe I’m being too generous.
What bothers me here is that one of you got downvoted into oblivion, the other got upvoted just as much, and from where I’m standing, it seems like both of you are on the same side.
You my friend have a desecration kink, closely related, but not necessarily paired with a degradation kink. Easy litmus test in a less religious context - does the fact that you’re doing that to someone’s daughter/son actually kinda turn you on?
Why is 50% the target?
The same way you safely prepare steak tartare?
What? No they don’t. Unless “had” is the operative word there.
No one’s doing anything about it now and everyone knows it’s happening (no one’s meaningfully denying it, some people are just secretly fine with it). Why would an expose spelling it out after the fact change anything? We’ve done this dance before unfortunately.
Yes, but I’ve had it across multiple sites that play video, so I don’t think it’s youtube.
Just make sure you put in a stop-loss order
You keep telling the next investor it’ll be profitable soon. I believe the guy that came up with this scheme first went to prison or something, but afterwards we all collectively decided we were cool with it.
It’s not about the protocols. It’s about business. We can have all the tech we want but until someone is willing to establish relationships with and pay the 3-4 middlemen involved in every single card payment it ain’t happening.
Did he actually recommend one? That said, it’s obvious the author favors Marginalia personally, but there’s no point pretending they don’t have biases. At least for me, making them obvious helps.
Idk, doing this “properly” would take an immense amount of effort and manpower. This feels more like a “let me get enough info for an educated guess” EDA process, which still seems to have taken a lot of effort and I appreciate it a lot.
No one is arguing any of the points above. But to quote the Wikipedia article:
While many developments failed to live up to initial lofty promises, most of them eventually became occupied when given enough time.[6][16]
Citation 16 is a Bloomberg article from 2 years ago in case you’re wondering.
Put yourself in my shoes, I can’t exactly propose edits to that statement based on a single youtube video of a ghost town existing.
Your conclusion ("How could they? ") does not follow from your premises, much as I agree with them.
Idk man, I feel like there were definitely a couple
I’m starting to believe this is a bad faith argument. Do you have anything addressing the specific point of ghost cities actually (not) being populated now?
For those that are too lazy to read:
Plus it irritates the skin less cause you only really need 1-2 passes (shaving with those multi blade razors takes ages and 3-5 passes in my experience if the hair is anything beyond 1 mm long). Remember to rinse the blade every 1-2 passes too.