jimmycrackcrack

sounds good but negative on both counts, no account, not in the US. Thanks though.

Imagine you're the master race, confident and strong and then some people wear different clothes than you expected on TV and your whole world is just shattered lol.

Don't listen to this guy he's a liar, he says he lives in your computer but he's really in my phone.

True though that may be, there's no benefit to mentioning that in this situation.

I haven't been to the states but I can compare Burger King UK to Burger King (Hungry Jacks) Australia and also Hungry Jacks to any other burger place that isn't Mc Donald's (because that's just a tie). BK UK was significantly worse than the Aussie version but I nevertheless indulged quite a few times whilst there, ironically probably even more than here in Australia. Despite managing to be worse, it still occupies that very wide band between just under the threshold of good all the way down to just above actually inedible and usually if going for BK it's definitely because "it'll have to do" and it always does.

Hungry Jacks (BK) compared to an actual good burger joint here in Australia stands no chance but it does fulfill its promise of a consistent standard, even if it's a low one and that's a good thing since you can find some awful shit here like a local cafe's burger or those Vietnamese lunch bars that have to offer a 'burger' on their otherwise nice menu. But of course the flipside is you can get good to great burgers easily as well as long as you go somewhere that's actually a burger place not somewhere that just has a burger option.

I think an important related aspect is that the 'unfortunate things' that happen make it only "not quite as great" but are definitely destined to make it "the worst". That way there's a sense of urgency that you wouldn't otherwise get from just "not quite as awesome as it could be, but still the best"

They could be, but you'll likely notice they look significantly different and probably worse than the still you would see when examining the photo roll. The reason for this I've outlined in an EDIT to my question, but basically it's recording 1 video and 1 still. If you're seeing stills from a group belonging to a top shot, it might be that this ente.io is splitting the video in to stills, as Google expects you to do using the photos app which would be fine if video and image stills are the same thing, but video stills are much lower quality than image stills.

I still have to put up with it a little bit but I made it my life's mission to avoid it as much as possible whilst still being part of mainstream society. I'm so glad that this meme indicates that FINALLY other people are not only not doing it but also denouncing it as much as I have. I've had to hold back on bitching about how stupid and irritating it is because it was always something everyone else seemed to have viewed as a mundane, at worst neutral and at best good aspect of everyday life that wasn't that hard and gave you nice looking clothes. You can't complain at length about something that is considered in those terms because you just come off as a boring crank. But now finally, if only for a moment I can still feel normal whilst embracing my abiding hatred of the pointless and time wasting practice.

FUCK ironing, and especially fuck whatever dipshit came up with it. Before this was invented wrinkled clothes would have to have been but a fact of life. I'm near certain whoever did come up with this was someone who knew they personally would never have had to do it. For centuries it would have been palmed off on the usual people that had to carry out the shitwork and now, in modern times, we didn't jettison the practice along with the sexism and classism that forced some to have to do it and not others, we just made it so that now we all have to do it. It delivers no benefit, it's so fucking stupid aaagghh! Because of the conventions and expectations that formed around it, I'm unfortunately forced to participate in it despite my misgivings, even if only on the bare minimum of occasions. If I have a job interview, or I'm going to a fancy event I have play in to this ridiculous farce that is noticeable only from its absence and help perpetuate it. I sincerely hope this generation really has managed to abolish it and it's only the remnants of my own upbringing and peers that mean I still have to occasionally do it because the world will be objectively better off if no one ever does this again.

yeh top shot. Though it's a moot point now because I've since discovered Top Shot is not just a burst mode with the images packaged in to one file like I thought.

well that's sort of the point of this comic because the one thing you'd really want it to be good enough to do and would love to be able to trust something to do for you is the tax and all the other tasks in the comics are things you were pretty well able to do yourself before, probably wanted to do before, and if not exactly wanted, at least didn't want something else to displace you in by taking over doing that task from now onwards especially if it was your actual job before. If displacing human workers for those tasks was the only problem, it'd be a sad but familiar story of progress but the fact that AI, at least for now is incapable of doing the part we'd all really love to have done for us is just the diarrhea icing on the dog turd cake.

I'm going to put this in an update as well but, the insurer said it was fine, the only effect they could foresee it having was if they could somehow trace back something I claim for to events happening in the first country visited, for example, if you have a medical problem in the 1st country, obviously they won't cover it, but if you have to pay for follow up medical services in country 2 for the same problem that started in country 1, they also won't cover that either. Otherwise though, not a problem where you departed from as long as you bought the insurance before leaving your home country.

The thing is now, manipulative tactics are used to persuade people to choose one option over another either for representatives, or in some cases like Brexit, directly for specific policies. In that scenario one might argue that those that successfully made the case for one side of the referendum did so by knowingly presenting the outcome of choosing one policy differently from what they knew to be the reality hence "manipulating" people.

However, with this proposed idea of being able to delegate your vote to other people or organisations, I'm concerned people will be manipulated into giving up their ability to vote on something one way or the other they don't even need to be convinced of the merits of something, just convinced to give it up. Seems like a small difference but I can imagine people being unknowingly disenfranchised thinking they're giving up something else, or possibly having to give up their vote even though they do want to use it because if they're offered some tangible immediate benefit in exchange, they might not be in a position to decline such an offer.

In these cases the distortion of the democratic ideal is worse than in the Brexit scenario for example, because at least in that situation one could say (however disingenuously) that that vote more or less reflected how convincing the case was for the leave campaign and argue that anyone saying that leave voters were manipulated is just being patronizing to such voters by denying their agency in the decision. Of course that's a simplistic way to portray it, but there's an element of truth there. At the very least that referendum does tell you what most people decided to vote for even if the details of how the cases were presented might be dishonest. Delegated votes would more accurately be described as a reflection of who successfully obtained votes through whatever means, not who prosecuted a case the most convincingly.