I mean, yeah. All of this. Absurd.

But, FWIW, offloading cheap tat onto charity shops is not going to work well. It costs them money to put it on a shelf and it probably takes up more space than it is worth. Plus, they very likely can’t sell electrical equipment that has had its cord chopped up and repaired, or at least not without spending more on having it tested than they could sell it for anyway.

Next time, find a friend with small feet who would like to take it off your hands.

Yes, yes it does.

Southern blot is a neat full circle:

The method is named after the British biologist Edwin Southern, who first published it in 1975.[3] Other blotting methods (i.e., western blot,[4] northern blot, eastern blot, southwestern blot) that employ similar principles, but using RNA or protein, have later been named for compass directions as a sort of pun from Southern’s name.

To start with the obvious:

How the Christian right took over the judiciary and changed America

And here’s a small selection of recent history from elsewhere:

How Ireland Turned ‘Fallen Women’ Into Slaves

Infidelity plus’ – the new defence against murder

Ugandan MPs pass bill imposing death penalty for homosexuality

So you haven’t been paying attention. Well done.

When I was born, married women were barred from most white collar jobs and women did not have the right to their own bank accounts, decades before rape within marriage was formally recognised as a crime.

If you are old enough to remember this era, you should realise that singling out these behaviours as somehow “Muslim” is bizarre.

I appreciate that that might not have been your intent (although it is certainly the subtext of this thread).

You must be very, very young if you do not remember these tropes being absolutely standard in the ‘Christian’ world, and not paying much attention now if you think they’ve completely disappeared since.

You know that money isn’t dug out of the ground, right? There’s no gold standard any more. The number of exchange tokens is irrelevant when you’re being extorted (most obviously on housing costs).

That’s true. To be clear, I’m not saying poverty is necessary. I’m saying it’s not because of the super rich (at least in the West). Nor am I saying the super-rich are useful.

If there is enough to go around, then your money-based maths must be incorrect. You’re contradicting yourself. Which is it?

It’s a bit more complicated than just adding up all the money and dividing it by the number of people.

Rich people don’t spend their money, they use it to outbid each other for control of existing assets that the rest of us need and have no choice but to pay them for. Instead of spending that money on things that other people get paid to make (the “trickle down” lie), they use it to extort us for access to things we need to survive.

There is plenty enough in this world to go around. That so many have so little is nothing to do with the amount of arbitrary exchange tokens that exist.

You can’t have an arbitrary list of words that count, precisely because most people won’t memorise the dictionary. They’ll just play words they know exist. And if a dispute arises they’ll likely consult a proper dictionary because who has the Scrabble dictionary to hand?

Its primary purpose is to list all the permissible two letter words because that’s where the desperation and disputes arise.

The 10x number of new words added compared to previous editions, and the nonsensical nature of so many of the new entries, says it has to be AI. There’s no way some of those would make it past a human editor (except one lazily accepting everything the AI suggests as truth).

No… at the store, where the parked vehicle is blocking your access.

If you need the loading ramp you could still use the spot and just reverse if it’s on the side he’s taking up.

Not if you can’t get into the vehicle in order to reverse it. There’s a reason they have protected width on both sides.

95% of people are not USian and also, can read the requested date format correctly.

Because Lemmy, as Reddit, is focused on topics not people. It’s not for influencers. Avatars on discussion boards are weird and unnecessary.

downvoted to oblivion for asking for a source

People who want to monetise their images need to add a credit to them. When I save an image and know who created it (which is very rare), I put their name in the name of the image I save so that I can give credit if I reuse it. If there’s an associated URL that belongs to the creator, I’ll bookmark it with the same name as the image so I can find it and link to it when I use the image.

That’s a lot of work to do on behalf of creators who cannot be arsed to sign their own images. Most of the time, I can’t do it because I have no idea where it came from anyway.

And they can sign images but not easily add a clickable URL so that’s not a perfect solution anyway.

I know this doesn’t cover all of the click-thefts. But a lot of those click-thefts aren’t really thefts. They’re crediting the original but it’s the repost that goes viral. That’s something that can’t really be avoided without some tools operating in the background to reallocate clicks to the creator. And that’s not going to happen because the hosts of the click-thefts have absolutely no interest in it happening.

There are some simple ways to avoid accidental theft though. On Twitter (old Twitter, I know nothing of recent Twitter), big accounts often (accidentally) stole likes and RTs by quote-retweeting instead of just retweeting. Most of the time, there was no need for them to add a comment. Just a straight retweet would have sent interactions to the original instead. There are some similar choices that can be made on other social media. Here, for example, an archive link is often the only way for many people to view the article. But if the original source is considered less evil enough to deserve the clicks, linking the original and providing an archive link is probably better than just using an archive link in the main post.

Lot of different issues, not all of them solvable, I don’t think.

Fair

No one has even quantified the entire ecosystem of Loch Ness. What makes you so cocksure of yourself?

but there’s a fixed food supply

You understand that fish breed, right? That all the food that any of us will ever need for generations to come does not currently exist in the here and now?