

Why not both?


Why not both?


A big bit of their campaign was how we got screwed over on our fisheries. We weren’t completely screwed, but the UK representative didn’t turn up to the meetings. Accounting for that, they were actually quite accommodating to our needs.
Guess who the representative was?
(Farage, for those out of the loop)


Can this be applied to house bricks too? Failing that, a bubble wrap envelope filled with rocks?
Unfortunately mailing a glitter bomb, or actual bullshit, could get you in trouble


The element can cool the air below zero. They have to play games if it gets to the due point of the outside air to keep from frosting up however.
Also, there is an efficiency hit, as the temperature differential gets larger. This is why ground sourced, or even water sourced are more efficient in colder climates.


Just make sure it’s from the wealthy, not a fellow poor, who happens to own a shop.


I’ve seen it happen in the UK. Large protests and UK news barely touches it. Even Facebook etc seems to push it down the rankings.
Because of this, the next protest is less effective, and so gets even less coverage on the international stage.


The revolution will not be televised.
The right wing, the world over, has realised that they don’t need to suppress protests. They just need to suppress the news coverage that lets them grow.
I’m not American, but I suspect there have been far more attempts at counter action that just didn’t get traction. You just never heard about them due to media capture.
You also need a trifacta to really gain ground. A ‘body’ of popular support (marches etc). A political ‘brain’ to focus and guide it. Finally, you need the option of teeth, to make the other side pay proper attention to you. The Irish troubles are an excellent example of this at play. 95% of it was peaceful marches etc. The last 5% was the IRA and political parties.
Right now, your political party has been captured by the rich, and a media blackout is stopping the body growing to the size that can actually support the teeth.


Ignorance, rather than stupidity. In many ways it’s worse. Stupidity can at best be outgrown with time. Ignorance is, in the modern world, a choice.


If I’m going to the bar, and it’s busy, I’ll grab drinks for the people I’m explicitly with. I also keep a vague mental track of if I’m in a deficit with someone (I owe them a drink to balance out).
I don’t do it with the expectation that they will buy my next drink however.


As I read it, it basically comes off as the author being grumpy that it’s harder to sponge off people who drink less, or slower.
I will do reciprocal drink buying, but hate formalising into “rounds”. My drinking rate can vary wildly. I don’t want to be forced to drink faster, to keep up with others.
Gen Z is the most financially squeezed age group in my memory. The fact they want to be more discerning in how much they drink and pay makes complete sense.
It’s also worth noting that contactless card machines also remove a major bottleneck in going to the bar.


I just get an urge for a large, sticky milkshake when I see him. I’ve no idea why…


It’s unlikely, but I’m still hoping his encounter with count binface throws him in the trash.


It’s above average, but I wouldn’t call it ridiculous. It’s just over a cup an hour.
If someone hit 50 cups I would be worried. At that point it’s better to move to a bigger mug, rather than more cups.


The ground has been dried out. It doesn’t happen often.
Also humidity is relative. Hot air holds a lot more water. The same amount of water will have a lower humidity, for a higher temperature.


For those confused. The training tried to say that autistic people were more likely to be socially isolated. That then makes them more likely to be “befriended” into extremism.
It was akin to saying “black people commit more petty crimes”. While technically true (poor people commit more petty crimes, and a disproportionate number of blacks are poorer), it runs roughshod over the people it’s trying to protect/help.
It’s worth noting that there is a cultural difference between the US and the UK. In the UK, the police police by consent, rather than police by force. It’s the reason that most police officers are not armed (and went against the government when they suggested it).
The police have a lot more trust than in the US. They are also less attractive to the aggressive power trippers. This limits the rot. They are not perfect, but I know, from friends, there is a continuous game of wack-a-mole going on, to deal with problematic officers, and break up problematic internal groups.
The end result, there is more trust given to the police themselves. They have also shown they won’t abuse it egregiously.