Davel’s here, though.

The cease fire they did work out which Israel repeatedly violated anyways?

Of course he did, since his boss said it was just a 3-day special military operation to begin with. How was Trump to know there would be more to it than that?

I think your example wins, OP, but I will say for anyone who works in an office environment: Microsoft Office (or Libre alternatives for my FOSS friends which don’t have logins to begin with but whatever).

Imagine if you had to log in every time you opened up a document, and you get automatically logged out after 10 minutes of inactivity and lose any unsaved progress.

Global productivity would grind to a halt. (That, or people finally switch to LibreOffice or similar, but corpos will still reliably do whatever decision seems dumbest).

The problem is that when the other half of the country learns that fact, they think “Good.”

Still seems up in the air. Just looking at the current numbers from CBC, the NDP is only slated to take 8 seats, so it seems like BQ is going to be the one with the cards, assuming the tides don’t suddenly shift.

Likely not, it seems wasteful if the product is otherwise good in all other important regards. I’d just cover up the LED with tape or paint.

Without going into spoilery details, the film Conclave raised a very interesting question about pope eligibility. Recommend checking it out, not just for the topical relevance but also simply because it’s a good movie.

Hours later, even.

As others have said, Francis also stacked the electors who will be deciding the next pope, so it is possible that his successor will also be just as progressive (well, progressive for the leader of a conservative religious institution, at least).

Generally no, but it depends on how you handle the interaction.

This whole situation seems a bit odd and I can’t help but feel like we’re not really getting the full picture. But at a surface level, if someone takes what is really just a misunderstanding or miscommunication and turns that into a character assassination against you without giving you the chance to explain yourself, that is not something you should feel obligated to just accept.

But it depends a lot of how you handle it. If you just take the opportunity to fire back and make this a “them” problem, knowing they have some mental disability that could have caused them to misread the situation, that would be ableist.

What you could do is simply respond along the lines of “I can understand why you’d feel this way if what you believe is true, but I think I didn’t explain myself clearly, and that’s on me.”

I mean sure, if what America wanted to hear was “day 1 dictator”, “mass deportations”, “tariffs”, and “finish the job [in Gaza]”.

He’s doing exactly what he promised. This is exactly what America voted for.

And yet America wouldn’t even elect that, given the choice.

There’s always hope. The feeling you are experiencing is what the people who are causing all of that want you to feel.

Now if everything seems bleak and hopeless all the time, that’s also a strong indicator of depression, and may also be worth talking to a professional about. Or if not a professional, at least people in your life whose perspectives matter more than random internet strangers like me.

I feel like it’s just going to be round 1 of Canada and Mexico all over again. The pause for them didn’t make a difference. He said “let’s make a deal”, Canada and Mexico made a deal, and then 30 days later the tariffs began regardless.

No one is making deals this time because everyone knows they won’t affect the outcome. What is affecting the outcome is making threats. So either he just stubbornly waits it out, getting nothing in return before they happen anyways, or he chickens out and walks it all back.

I think they mean not letting the ideas go unchallenged. If someone is reading through and sees a bunch of Nazis posting hate all up somewhere with no one else saying anything, they might assume that sort of behavior is just tacitly accepted and influence their perception of the community as a whole.

Glad to see more people leave it, but at this point it’s almost more embarrassing to have taken so long.

“If you had just picked a better water bucket, we wouldn’t be in this mess. It’s your fault if the house burns down.”

Humans (and most other animals) see better side-to-side than up-down. Your eyes are spaced horizontally, giving us a wider horizontal field of vision. People generally prefer putting things side-to-side in work environments, maybe also reflecting how much easier it is to move and work within a horizontal plane than a vertical one. So the upper threshold for monitor width would be longer than the upper threshold for monitor height.

That being said, I know reading is best done in narrower columns, to reduce the amount of left-right movement your eyes need to do which can cause you to lose your place when skimming lines. Three columns of text on a 16:9 monitor is way more readable than one column of text that spans the entire monitor.

And then why do we make an exception for phones which are predominantly used in portrait mode? I guess maybe just for easier 1-handed use? Maybe also to give us more peripheral vision of potential hazards and other things happening in the background when using them, since they’re mobile devices.

Ending it as quickly and painlessly as possible then, I guess. I stick by the opinion that a life without agency and with no means to obtain it isn’t really living at all.