Or, you know, if you read the prompt before sending, look at the question after you’ve selected it, or just read your own work once. This method will only work if students are being really stupid about cheating.

Tbh my only gripe with this post is the assumption that because a man is explaining something to a group of women, it’s automatically mansplaining. Although I guess it’s a joke so whatever.

The second one made me dislike them, but the fifth one was the straw that broke the camel’s back.

Transferring files that way actually seems really useful, I did not think of that

I don’t think etiher is implied here, but sure, I suppose it can be a conversation starter.

Thanks, that’s one of my main goals in life.

I can definitely see the point if it’s literally all there is in the feed, but if you just watch things from people you disagree with from time to time, and the algorithm picks up on it, there’s bound to be a few things in your feed that might “look bad” if they are used to draw conclusions about your worldview from someone who doesn’t know you.

Next time I talk to a girl at a party, I’m gonna ask to see her browser history “because it’s a good test for red flags.” Judging someone by what they watch or read is stupid. Judging someone by what YT thinks they would like to watch is even worse. I know this is completely besides the point, and it is just a meme, but judgy behavior like that irks me.

Why?

I’m genuinely curious about how the average interaction went, given that you weren’t immediately turned away.

Unless, you know, they got unlucky and got sick anyways.

I’m inclined to agree with this. Jones doesn’t seem like someone trying to sell a bunch of crazy conspiracy theories which he doesn’t believe himself. He seems like he’s just genuinely batshit crazy.

Fair point, albeit a different one from the one I was making.

Oh, I’m not blaming you at all, I’m just commenting on the article

Misleading title. Not incorrect, but it is based on what the source of income is, it is not about how rich you are relative to the rest of the population. The title makes it sound like if you make a certain amount of money, your tax rate is lowered. Alternatively, it sounds like the richest Dutch are evading 12% worth of taxes. But neither of these are true statements AFAIK, and either way they aren’t made in the article, so the title is misleading.

Edit: Changed “the top 1%” to “the richest Dutch”.

The past tense of yeet is yöted

Maybe a word which likens it to how water flows in a river? How about rivering?

I agree with that, it’s important to consider what’s being advertised and in what way.

Lamest take

I’ve seen their ads in Sweden before IIRC. They don’t seem to be very common though. Why don’t you like that they’re advertising?