I would count a grouping of water as having absorbed itself personally. But either way, it technically can’t absorb any more water, so it is always at the absorption max, whether that’s 0% or 100% water.

Pro-death penalty, gender-specific application, and ignoring due process probably puts this on the right.

Plenty of people on the left advocate for self-defense even to the point of lethal force but almost all of those would want an investigation and trial, and that probably means holding the killer in jail until a bond hearing. Carte blanche trust that the killer was justified is something unlikely to be offered outside of individualist people with a very strong distrust of the government to interfere with people’s lives, and those tend to be on the right. It also implies women need a legal exception as a vulnerable group which reinforces the traditional idea that they are dependent on external protection.

I would say this still works.

Assuming we are not compressing it, you cannot fit more water into water. Therefore, water is saturated with itself. Therefore, it is soaked. Therefore, it is wet.

Most deodorants are both deodorant and antiperspirant, but you can find options that are just the latter and otherwise unscented. You could also pair it with cologne if there are types that don’t bother you, but people mainly care about not smelling sweat.

I haven’t heard of hiring life coaches for poor people but I agree that would be an example of inefficient spending. I meant things like healthcare. The US spends more on healthcare than any other country, and so when a government program like Medicare or Medicaid covers a bill that means a very large subsidy. College is likewise exceptionally expensive, so need-based scholarships become a big expense.

If there was more of a focus on making these affordable in the first place, the cost for each covered individual would go down for taxpayers. This would free up the budget to expand coverage and offer more quality assistance in other places. Instead, it’s just a reactive policy of paying whatever the bill is when someone does qualify. This creates pressure to restrict who qualifies and what’s covered to keep prices down, while hospitals and colleges get away with charging absurd amounts since the beneficiary doesn’t feel the cost individually.

About 6 in 10 Americans say personal choices are a “major factor” in why people remain in poverty, while just under half say unfair systems are a major factor and about 4 in 10 blame lack of government support.

I think a lot of people in the comments are acting as if there is only one cause, and individual choices cannot be it because it doesn’t account for everything. Admittedly, the headline does frame it as if people believe it is the sole cause, rather than just the most popular. Personally, I would say both personal choices and unfair systems are major factors.

For lack of Government support, I am not sure how I would answer. The government actually does spend a lot on assistance for the poor relative to other countries, but I believe it is not done so efficiently to lift people out of poverty. It is very reactive and focuses on treating symptoms of core issues, so you end up with a lot of people in a constant state of being just barely able to keep their head above the water. It’s largely half measures that end up with worse outcomes and being more expensive in the long run than proper investment into making things better would be.

When you start making people feel the need to defend themselves you’ve probably gone overboard on the generalization.

I am returning to Hollow Knight thanks to the Silksong hype. I had dropped it before because I was unsure where I needed to go to progress and was getting sick of running around the map trying to figure out which paths were actually available to me and which needed some equipment I didn’t have. Well, I did figure it out and basically have everything important unlocked so now I am enjoying it again.

If you do pick it up again, I have some advice. First, there’s a relic in an area called the Hive that will give you passive health regen if there’s a long enough gap between instances of damage. This means you can keep messing up a platforming section and as long as you don’t rush it you can heal back after messing up without needing new sources of soul. Second, there are some sections that are traversable with minimal equipment but become trivial with more. Deepnest was really annoying to me when I went through it and I frankly would have probably enjoyed it if I had one really helpful item unlocked (or even just a bit more health). Third, don’t worry too much about money. Normal enemies don’t give you much from farming and I think I’ve run out of stuff to spend it on mostly from other sources. So don’t be afraid to let it go. If you’ve unlocked the fast travel thing, just head back to vendors when you’ve noticed you accumulated a decent amount.

Like I said, I’m enjoying the game again after years away, but I really wish they had a better way of letting you know where you should go next and what isn’t available to you. Needing to go through zones again to check if something is now unlocked or not is tiresome. The pins help but they are not enough, and I didn’t think to reserve certain colors for certain types of obstacles the first time.

I’m glad someone mentioned the 2008 financial crisis. Banks need to be fairly confident the person they are giving the mortgage to can afford the payment now and for the next thirty years. There are plenty of unfair reasons why someone may not be able to buy a home today, but not being able to afford a down payment is not one of them.

It depends on what you mean by current spending. I’m putting almost a third of my pre-tax income into savings already. If you mean I can live off of 65% of my default post-tax salary, sure. That probably wouldn’t change too much from my current expenses, and I would love the free time. If you mean 65% of what’s left over after my normal contributions, then that would be pretty tough. I consider my current lifestyle to be relatively frugal, so that would be very hard.

I’m actually trying to achieve the FIRE lifestyle, so the goal is getting to the point where average post-tax returns on investments is at least annual expenses. But I can’t do it by thirty.

It implicitly praises Silksong for being popular, but it is also just relevant news for people interested in gaming. Someone who doesn’t know or care about Silksong might still like to know that various store platforms were down recently and why.

You’re getting downvoted, but this is literally the positive use case for it. I don’t buy new games much, but when I do I “pre-order” the day before so I can download it early and get whatever other incentives there are. Reviewers getting early copies means you can have everything you reasonably need to know to make an informed decision about whether a game is worth buying.

It’s of course true that they can change the game between the early copies and release, but then having it downloaded early also means you can refund it sooner if necessary and get on with your life. Some games rely more on multiplayer or live service, but those are the sorts of games it’s worth waiting for community feedback after release anyway.

But Genesis 3:16 seemingly has God setting man above woman, so a Christian could just use that instead.

To the woman he said, “I will make your pains in childbearing very severe; with painful labor you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.”

I suppose you could argue it only applies to a husband and wife, or possibly even just Adam and Eve specifically, but that seems unlikely given the first part applies to women as a whole.

There’s also Timothy 2:11-13, and Christians tend to hold the new testament in high regard.

11 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve.

(from the NIV for both)

So it seems like the Bible explicitly has God himself commanding sexism, rather than it needing to be inferred from symbolism.

OP said “just mod it in urself” and “just alter the html code urself”, despite the fact that mods and browser extensions are almost always free. And the other things they mentioned still tend to have cheap options commonly available unlike other markets where everything has gone up together.

So it doesn’t seem like they are complaining about the price of things, but rather that no one has already made what they want. It strikes me as entitled. For all its sins, capitalism does tend to produce a lot of types of products so long as there is demand for them. I don’t think any economic system would be to blame for not making some very specific thing readily available.

Also, the way they worded it makes it sound like they think other people should be dedicating their time to these things because it’s less valuable than OP’s.

Which scenario do you think is more representative of the average cow’s life?

I think this is the right explanation, assuming the story is true. Dry noodles expand when put in hot water, and I would think that includes gastric acids in the human body. The boy started having symptoms in half an hour and died soon after. That’s too fast for something like food poisoning, and they didn’t find anything wrong with the noodles being sold. So it sounds like pressure buildup from them expanding inside him caused damage.

OP, I would be careful not to eat too much at once, and eat slowly. The boy ate three packets at once. Maybe eat some other stuff with it so the noodles can’t build up a large mass of just noodles.

I think the undo button was Android-only

How can you think it’s proven as the only reason for their objection? And why do you think I’m a threat to women? Just because we’ve both been saying it’s bad that men have this unfortunate stereotype?

At best, you would still only have correlation implying causation. But seriously, nothing in these comments shows your accusations as reasonable, let alone true.

This analogy is specifically from the perspective of crewmates. It is wrong for crewmates to die, actually, because this brings your team closer to defeat. I think you might also think that I view the crewmates as women?

No, I didn’t think you were making the crewmates just women. My point was, it’s not morally wrong for the imposters to kill in the game, because unlike real life, the sides are diametrically opposed and all players want their opponents to earnestly try to win. Crewmates don’t want imposters to just let them do tasks because then there would be no game. In that sense, killing crewmates is cooperating by making it a fun challenge for everyone. By the same token, it’s not morally wrong for crewmates to make accusations against people in meetings or otherwise treat them suspiciously, it’s how everyone wants others to play. But the moral weight to accusations in real life means it’s not ok to make them casually. There is a burden of proof to overcome.

If the game were programmed such that red crewmates were exclusively the ones chosen to be imposters, regardless of how this might damage the video game’s fun, don’t you think that being near a red crew member would set off some alarm bells? Wouldn’t you think of green crew members as more safe?

I don’t know where you are going with this. I guess my level of caution would depend on frequency of imposters. If half of red crewmates were imposters, sure. If it’s 1 in 1000, I wouldn’t be alarmed. But that’s not representative of real life either. Neither predators nor victims of sexual crimes are exclusive to any group. We could talk about statistics but this is about perception of threat and fear. They’re only very loosely tied to reality, especially when it comes to small samples like individual encounters with strangers.

Again, you cannot assume that they chose to call it unfair simply as a self-defense mechanism. Imagine someone accused your family of being murderers, then said the only reason you would be upset by that is if you really did have murderous proclivities and felt self-conscious about it.

And frankly, even if that was their entire motivation for calling it unfair in the first place, it does not mean they are wrong.