![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.ml/pictrs/image/8nN0qtLEOJ.png)
Disco Elysium has entered the chat
Disco Elysium has entered the chat
Is making art with the rain an option?
Sand darkens when wet so that could make a cool canvas, theoretically.
You could also play with that “wall of rain” effect you sometimes see when you are just outside of a heavy rain area.
Alternatively, just make “social commentary” like a torrential downpour on the financial district. Sometimes art is just revenge.
Hunting down Catholic priests
Turns out they were basically bounty hunters for Catholic priests during Elizabeth I’s reign.
“Really? How about dying for it?”
What’s the old lingers?
The problem with the Senate is that it gives land more power than people. The weight given to a Senate voter in a less populated state like Montana is like 40x that of a voter in a state like California. Abolishing the Senate would move the power of each voter closer to equality. Anti-gerrymandering measures would get you the rest of the way there.
I think taxes on financial shenanigans like carried interest, inheritance, and capital gains would probably be more effective than taxing luxury goods. Most rich people don’t actually spend the majority of their money on physical things. Mostly they just shuffle it around into various instruments to avoid taxes and maximize returns.
The community’s called work reform.
Make them open and close in a circular pattern like a camera aperture and I’m in
I had heard the servitor story before but forgot where it was sourced. Do you happen to remember which book it came from?
RomneyCare was similar to Obamacare, mostly based on an individual mandate to buy private sector plans.
If we find people who regret it, do we then need to ban it? Is there a certain threshold of regretful people we need to meet?
Do you expect a lot of people to regret something that happened to them before they were capable of forming memories?
deleted by creator
Yeah cool, don’t explain or anything
I’d argue that debates aren’t useful without a neutral, mutually trusted media source that listeners from both sides would refer to for fact-checking. The US has debates but the soundbites that partisan media air are the main way people consume them. Few people watch the whole debate, and few want to because they’re mostly just hot air.
Plus, one candidate can use the debate to lie out of their ass and at least one media source will follow that up by spitting out misleading info to support the lies.
I don’t mean to both-sides this, obviously right wing media is more egregious on this front. But their captured audience tuning out fact-checks from other media is maybe the bigger problem.
All of this happening on the sidelines fundamentally alters the purpose of a debate. For example, changing the tone and style of interaction; people aren’t trying to come to an agreement or win over new supporters, just shout over someone to get in soundbites that can be replayed by their team.
I’m sure they’ll do it in a way that’s convenient and doesn’t require 14 clicks through obnoxiously designed popups every single time you use a Google service. Yep, certainly no way this could go wrong.
In some countries, they are
General strike/protest? Get enough people making noise on the street and people will have to listen. With a presidential election coming up, Dems won’t be able to fully ignore it either.
Am I missing something? I only see the AI overview as an option after clicking the “try new features” lab logo. Are some versions of Google search forcing this feature currently?