I think that's my point. With PIC S2 we even get a second version of the Borgs. What's that all about? And then dropped and never discussed again. None of it is really reconcilable. They haven't explained it because they can't get out of corners they write themselves into. The Klingons are just another dishonorably unfortunate corner.

By European standards nothing to write home about. By Asian standards, a Mount Everestrian protrusion.

I think with Disco S1 they attempted a reset that didn't work. They all looked the same. Nobody really liked it. So they reverted to giving them hair and there's a throwaway line in S2 by Burnham that's tantamount to admitting failure by the show runners. And then we don't hear anything about it again. My guess is SNW will continue with ridged Klingons and just never explain it.

If they really wanted to go into canon, you could say there was the augment era during ENT, then they fixed their ridges with a hypospray, and then just before SNW reaches TOS times, there was a recurrence of the augment craze on Qronos. Or a COVID like virus escaped from a lab. It would be odd because all the characters we know from TOS never comment on this oddity - Spock, Kirk, Uhura have all seen ridged Klingons, then the smooth kind, and then ridged again in the movies. But stranger plot points have been ignored in Trek. Borg Queen anyone?

Lenmy offers me the freedom to get mad at many different people running instances and not just one godforsaken company running roughshod over everything communities had created over years.

I'm not mad at anyone though because I don't share your views at all. I'm a happy Lemmy user.

And what is Lemmy dot world acting like at night?

I'm going to say yes and no to that one. At the time they establish forevermore what is left-wing and what is right-wing, we're past the estates general being called and I think also past the tennis court oath. For me, that's already revolutionary times, they just haven't cut Louie's head off yet.

Before that, I don't think there was much exchange between the second and the third estate. I am sure there were nobles who were willing to change things around. But it also wasn't a case where the second and the third estate, and maybe even the king, could agree on something and that would've been the end of that. France was riddled by internal fiefdoms with their own dumb trumpian tariffs. Any relief for the third would have had to involve rationalizing the economy and there were powerful lobbies (like the farmer general) who wouldn't like that. Plus, people were hungry and hungry people don't think straight. And Louie would've preferred to stick his head in the sand anyway and other than maybe Necker none of his ministers satisfied the requirements of "forward looking."

What you're asking is a counter factual. There is no way to answer this question either way. The thing with revolutions is that people suspect it is coming at some point but are still surprised when it happens. The recent fall of Assad in Syria - we'd all forgotten about that mess. East Germany celebrated its 40th anniversary with socialist pomp and circumstance and crumbled a month or so later. The French Revolution was not just about abandoning feudalist structures. It ran in parallel with famine due to terrible weather, a looming bankruptcy of the crown, inefficient leadership from the king, a new way of leadership expected by his subjects, (invented) scandals that were spread by what would become mass media, and the changes in thinking in the age of enlightenment with people engaged in virtuous one-up-manship. That's after France had lent a helping hand to the American Revolution, not so much out of commitment to the cause but to point the finger at the neighbors across the Channel. You needed all of this in the blender to get to a point where enough people were radicalized enough to start chopping heads off. So even if they had found a negotiated solution to address the class problem, the revolution might still have happened, maybe a bit different, maybe not at all. Nobody knows.

Hoisted by my own methtard.

Hmm sound like something a meth dealer would say

I assure you. I'm not a meth dealer. Really. I don't know what else to tell you!

Thanks for answering my question.

If I were a breaking bad meth dealer and had all my buyers as contacts on that phone and all my incriminating chats, I wouldn't use biometrics to unlock it. But I'm not a meth dealer (and I'm not just saying that because that's what a meth dealer would say).

There is a spectrum of convenience vs. security. It depends on where you sit. I'm okay with the fingerprint, wouldn't go for the face.

Doesn't Android have the panic/cop switch where you force password over biometrics unlocking? It's not a 100% failsafe but it is a start.

Technically, they don't have to be. They could elect a venerable whippersnapper cardinal - Dan Brown wrote a book about that. And that tells you how likely that is if he wrote the story. But it is possible.

It would be rare because it takes seniority to get into the position. And politics to be well liked enough to be put forward and then elected. By mostly old people. Some of whom would like the job themselves.

Proton has a good calendar service but if you want to change color labels you need to be on the more expensive tier - and they don't really tell you that ahead of time. Which p'ed me off so much I moved my calendar to a Nextcloud server instead, which works great. It also got me off Keep, Drive, and I'm working on Gmail.

Full frontal nudity? I suspect then Winnie the Pooh will be next because he's not wearing pants.

I imagine if Virtus was fully clothed but the tyrant at her feet was reduced to a bloody mash with bullets from a semiautomatic assault rifle, this would be okay for the elementary school kids in TX.

Respect it as art and entertainment people like. Personally, could not care less.

First of all, all languages do this to an extent. Singling out America or English seems pointless to me.

Geographical names are a nonsensical construct of traditions, conventions, and misunderstandings. Why shouldn't a language come up with names that suit their tongue? Why shouldn't they go with whatever becomes consensus in their language? Being correct is overall less important than being understood. And that's being understood by your peers, not the people on the other end of the world.

With place names it's often old conflicts and historical differences that prevent adoption of modern place names. English is one of the few languages that made the change from Peking to Beijing, others didn't want to be told "by the commies" what to call the city. People who were fighting Napoleon 200+ years ago still call Nice in France by its Italian name Nizza, the name of the city in circulation prior to the French takeover. Out of principle. Europe, where the spoken common language variety is greater than in North America, is more used to this and people just know Brussels can also be Brussel, Brüssel, or Bruxelles. It's like the imperial system of measurements: it makes no effing sense but it works.

If you argue respect you're going to hit a massive wall with some languages. Mandarin Chinese is fresh in my mind that has very colorful names for all the places of the world that often have little or nothing in common with what the locals call it. Meiguo for America? Is that disrespectful? No, when you learn that this sort of means beautiful country. And it would take ages to get English speakers onto the same page calling China Zhongguo. And I'm quite sure the locals of Zhongguo would not understand the average American Joe saying it. So what would be gained by making that switch?

Turkey wanted to change its English name because they don't like the association with the eponymous bird. If the bird was commonly referred to as something else, and English wasn't the lingua franca of the world, this would not have come up. Other languages have stuck with their version of Türkiye. And for the English speaking world I see an uphill battle for this to catch on. People only switched to Kyiv out of spite for Russian bombs. People are still going to say Turkey and not mean the bird. Same is true for recent gulf name changes.

English is half filled with loanwords. Dejavu maybe just stands out to you. Parliament, pork, and necessary maybe not so much. I think all can be traced back via Norman French or later. All languages borrow words. Many of them change meaning and/or spelling after being borrowed. This is normal.

All of the things you complained about seem perfectly alright to me. You're looking for a fight with a windmill.

I don't have a desktop at hand to try and it doesn't work on mobile using the desktop site: can you drag pictures into the Photos folder from your Drive on desktop?

If that doesn't work or you've already tried that I'm afraid your SOL. You'll probably need to bounce them off a hard drive into the photos backup.

They can charge for the room. Why not make that mandatory? Makes business sense.

It's also part of the tradition in North America. It may not be the military but learning to live with people, maybe people you really don't like, is a life experience. And many people look back fondly at that, which they would not have chosen voluntarily.

If Apple were the only player on the block, at least in Europe they would be under a lot more pressure. But they're not. There are other OSs (although only one really matters), there are other phone makers.

Antitrust is more reactive. There is a market, a dominant player, said player plays unfairly, the authorities react. That reaction takes years to go through all the levels of courts available. By the time we get a final ruling, the market has long moved on. The corporations know that too. As long as the lawyers are cheaper than the money they stand to lose they will carry on.

And in Apple's defense: the mobile operating system market is not that old. And it's not clearly defined. And as long as there is wiggle room they can do whatever they want. Part of the problem is that the legislation dealing with antitrust on either side of the Atlantic is like copyright law: no longer fit for purpose.

I think that very much depends on how they're implemented. If there is some sort of electoral-college-equivalent in the process: very much more racist, isolationist, and misogynist. If it's absolute numbers and no distorting process is applied: more racist and isolationist but abortion will be legalized by a narrow margin.

when i wasn’t there 24/7, she’d abuse substances, harm herself, and the like. she reported hearing voices, had sleeping issues as well.

I think that answers your question. We all do real silly stuff in our teenage years but what you're describing here goes beyond that.