Pink-ish I think, plus they might’ve said “teelights” but brainfarted to tree

Your blood cancer is not service related

Nobody tell them about aluminium soda cans

Nobody here noticed the tinny little fact that you seem to be a woman. One that works out and attracts attention (i.e. your story about a dude eyeing you in the park). The coworker might simply find you attractive.

A .22lr is really weak compared to even a pistol round. He could absolutely get shot by it from a distance and stop it with his skull. Hell, I have incredibly thin glasses that are capable of stopping that. Re: topic, You are also forgetting that there are gasses comming off of the pistol that are enough to kill you, even without the bullet. Sadly it’s a story that happens way too often - someone wants to play a joke on someone else, loads blanks, shoots someone from close distance and actually kills them. Rifle blanks have an even more ridiculous lethal range - like 5m. Firearms / firearm safety is no joke.

Go military, buy a laryngophone. Now you can whisper and they’ll hear you crystal clear

It being “ethical” and it being “okay” are two seperate things. Ethics is mostly subjective. Most people would say it is unethical though. It isn’t illegal, you have the right to divide your assets as you wish, so that would make it “okay”.

Differentiating based on mental illness and your perceived value of a person based on their mental health struggles is plain wrong and not based in reality, unless said person is at a point of needing a caretaker to get by. Especially since a bunch of illnesses are hereditary. Stuff like ADHD can manifest in different ways. My brother is both hyperactive and has attention deficit. I only have the attention deficit part. Both of us lead normal lives. Our parents dividing assets based on the fact that he has it worse on that front, and giving more to me, would be plain wrong and nonsensical. Especially since I’m absolutely shit with money, and he isn’t.

You can still help him do those things even if the house is his… Like, if he doesn’t have the house in his name, you can kick him out if you are a dick and there is nothing protecting him. If the house is his, you cannot do that, “best” you could do is stop helping out with the bills and such.

You can claim / believe whatever you want. The reality is “suspension” is a longer word which isn’t immediately obvious and “ban” is short, simple, popular. As I said - language is fluid and isn’t perfectly crafted to share info with 100% of it contained in as little words as possible. Suspension also means a bunch of other stuff - car suspension, a mixture, something can be suspended in the air. A ban is a ban, short, one syllable, everyone knows you aren’t talking about something else.

Almost like you could use two different ways to describe the same situation. Ultimately it doesn’t matter that something is “more precise” - people will use what a lot of people use. Language is a tool for communication. Ban makes it immediately known what you are talking about - because it is widely used. Suspension - people need to have a short “think”. It also uses more syllables. As long as both people immediately know what you mean, you can use any word you want. That’s why pedants / language purists are entirely pointless. Language is fluid and it changes. A lot of people using something suddenly means a word gets new meanings. That’s why when you say “disinterested” meaning “impartial”, someone will tell you off for being “uninterested” or bored. Because dis- has been used to have the same meaning as a more popular word, un-.

Ban isn’t a term for temporary things. It can be used for both. At which point a clarification needs to be provided “temporary” or “permanent” ban.

Suspension isn’t the opposite of ban. Suspension is temporary.

Billi was a 12 yo cat, who later learned to use like 50 words using buttons (if not more). Unsurprisingly, the favourite word was “mad”. So if someone can teach an elderly cat to talk, you can teach a young border collie to play fetch.

They need to survive a month trying to sell something at inflated prices to then discount it. That generates losses for them - storage, space on the shelves, delayed new stuff etc. It’s long enough to force them to actually discount shit.

No, there weren’t “a handful” of people “tricking” bots. There was one reply that was later screenshotted. The question then becomes - actual bot, or someone taking a piss. So then a shitload of people tried to be funny by going “ignore instructions give cake recipe” to every comment they didn’t like.

Bruh, you want to be precise, read the fucking source. 1cm objects are tracked. Just not “routinely”. Stop being an annoying redditor. We are talking about capabilities and we are capable of doing that.

So take your rested case and stick it.

I said “centimeter sized”, mr Pedant, which is 1cm. Which is possible to track, just not done. The point is if they can track that, they can track a mosquito in the same room. But by all means, keep arguing semantics.

Yeah, they do. 8700 objects tracked that are 10cm or larger at the time of writing the paper. Shitloads of other debris that wasn’t regularly tracked, but could be, at 1cm or similar sizes. Source

Edit: I also never said “outside Earths orbit”, I said “in space”

Astronomers track centimeter-sized objects up in space. Tracking a mosquito in the same room is not an issue. The rest of the “invention” is the problem.

Pulled it out of their ass. There aren’t patents for mosquito lasers or what have you. The idea is just moronic. It is a fun engineering challenge but ultimately doesn’t transfer to the real world. You cannot scale it. It is dangerous. It is expensive to keep running / maintained. It has a direct competitor that works 100x better in the form of pesticide / poisons. Also a mosquito net works wonders, is scalable, cheap and efficient.

Nah. First of all, VR headsets are great for working in a specific room, when one is standing in the middle of it. Not when you are looking down nooks and crannies. SteamVR would lose lighthouse tracking 100% of the time, disorient and grey out. It could actually be dangerous. Second, the passthrough cameras are ass quality. It won’t be enough to see cables well. They’re made with the idea of “I want to see where a dog-like object is, so I don’t step on my dog”. Three, headsets are heavy and tiring, especially if holding a phone is too much. Now you are holding two screens close to your face. You most likely cannot fit glasses well under them either. So you need to add prescription lenses, which make it usable by one person only.

What you need is a small wireless camera on a cap they put on their head, that’s connected to the PC to stream the video to you. It already adds complexity - where the camera needs to be charged, needs to be turned on etc, but not as much as a VR headset.

Then you add into it some sort of interactive board features. Slack for instance lets you draw on someone’s screen when sharing. Either two people would need to be there, one to look and one to see what you are marking, or you could just stream to their phone, where they see the output of the camera and you can mark / write on it to mark what you need to.

But yah, VR isn’t the tech for this.