I suppose whether people leave also depends on a countries quality of life. From what I understand there’s the general consensus that people who can afford it and those who can make a living in another country, are the first to leave when there’s eg conflict/war/apocalypse. I’m not sure how much this affects billionaires or business owners, but assume it has at least a little effect.

It seems the meat lobby is way too strong. 🙄

I was expecting the third panel to consist of pulling out cards, dice or game boards and the likes.

Like every other human.

Why is only every other dead human silent? What about the other half?

You can simply take the break and socialize without the smoking part.

Minesweeper is notorious for having some luck to it.

There’s guess-free versions that guarantee solvable games. There’s also ones that automatically place a mine on the clicked tile if you take an unnecessary guess. Personally I really like https://davidnhill.github.io/JSMinesweeper with only “Fast mode” (and optionally “No guess”) enabled and everything else off.

It doesn’t seem like trolling to me. Posts do not seem offensive and don’t seem to break any of the rules. It seems to be a strong opinion, perhaps misinformed or naive or confusing. But not flat out trolling.

its probably no use to talk with you

I think this thought is a dangerous one. It’s a sort of trap that people fall into. It’s very alluring and easy to say that. Yet I suggest people stay vigilant and brave and avoid it. Keep in mind it’s difficult for people to let go of their opinions, don’t resent them for it and try to understand their point of view, maybe there’s something in it for you to learn.

collations that ignore the first choice are not legitimate

Why so? Why do you assume that one party should arbitrarily be given more rights/power than others? Where does this idea come from?

Imagine an even more extreme example. Assume the winning party had 5% of the votes and most other parties had around 4-5% of the votes. Then assume that the winning party is unable to convince any other parties to enter into a coalition with them. Should all other parties not be allowed to make a coalition to represent 95% of the voters? Should the “winning” party be allowed to block this? Why should such deadlocks be allowed? What is the argument behind this?

This assumes the opposing party represents every other vote cast, as well that peoples votes are entirely exclusive.

Keep in mind that literally every other party announced beforehand that they would NOT enter into a coalition with this particular party under its leadership. That means any people who voted for another party must’ve accepted this.

This comment confuses me. So in your opinion, in a proper good non-failing democracy should getting less than 29% of the votes mean you get to rule over everybody and make decisions without anybody interferring? So then in other words, <29% of the population should get to decide who rules alone over 100% of the population? That sounds like it’d be a very counter-productive system.

I’d add not using Amazon Prime, Amazon Web Services and other Amazon services. Not using X, being critical of SpaceX. Also, stop advertising these things, stop telling your friends about them, maybe even stop talking about them altogether. I think for some strange reason sometimes bad press is better than no press.

Does it make sense to blur names when they’re still relatively easy to decipher, when the project can be found on github and the top committer links to their Twitter account? 🤔

Reminds me of a funny performance about the topic by a commedian named ISMO. He does a lot of things with the English language.

Reminds me of Magic Maze, a boardgame in which players play a Barbarian, a Dwarf, an Elf and a Magician who lost all of their gear in battle and now resort to robbing a shopping mall so they can go on their next adventure.

Oh no ouch. A little bit depressing. Hope it gets better soon!

I think the perspective is confusing. Can’t really tell if the character is standing or lying, but I assume the latter.

To be fair I wrote the answer, then figured “surely somebody else must’ve written an answer by now”, refreshed, saw two other answers (one 12 seconds old), thought “fuck it” and posted anyway. They’re all written a bit differently so maybe some are easier to understand than others.

It’s a trap. The drawing is misleading. If the left triangle already has 60° and 40° then only 80° remains. Meaning there’s no right angle. The vertical line should be leaning to the left slightly. The correct answer is 135°.

“I know that it destroys our planet, but we shouldn’t restrict my money generation machine” - person who wants infinite money

20 years later…

“It’s too late now. You should’ve not dropped climate conservation and solved global warming without AI” - AI