Sync has been very user friendly for me, and the closest I felt to RiF

But also salt eats everything

So throw the windows in? The rest is rusty metal and plastics that become microplastics

Wonmiserating?

Honestly, in legal paperwork, consult the laws.

In everyday conversation, it’s what you feel.

I was born in South America, moved to the US when I was a child. I’m an adult now, my main language is English, I think in English, I grew up here, I have a life here.

If someone asked “what” I am, I say “I’m american, but I was born in South America.” It can be either a fun conversation, or a filter for judgy people I don’t want around me.

If I moved to Germany, I would still say I’m an American, because it’s the culture I know, the place I grew up, the identity I choose.

I don’t deny my heritage, I still enjoy Salteñas once a month with my family, I speak Spanish to my son to make sure he doesn’t forget it, I look Hispanic, I still have fond memories of being a child in another country, but I never say I’m “Bolivian-American,” because by circumstances of life I just have more identity of my life, here.

This is why we need government that isn’t in the pocket of corporations.

We need something like lawmakers having to disclose their tax information annually. If you want to be in office and make millions you should be willing to put your morals on the review table.

I had to look it up because I used to play Warcraft 2 before I learned English so to me the codes were nonsensical lol It’s “it is a good day to die” for god mode

I had a bunch of sheets of paper with codes for StarCraft, Warcraft, GTA, and even game genie codes for every Pokemon game.

Uhhhh not to be that guy, but um, ackhshually, “power overwhelming” was for StarCraft and it was “Glittering Prizes” for Warcraft 2

She definitely doesn’t deserve this.

That being said, addressing him directly and with power, but calmly could be an option. Don’t do it alone, but approaching a little and saying “I’ve noticed you at least 5 separate times and it’s creeping me out, please stay away from me.”

He’ll most likely deny it or try to play it off, maybe even insult her, but standing her ground and saying “I don’t believe you, I’m only asking nicely this time, there’s no next time without the cops” and then walking away.

No insulting, no debating. It’s a notice.

And of course, actually follow through, you see him again then call the non-emergency line and make a report. He can lie all he wants, once somebody has 2 or 3 police reports to prove he keeps showing up where they are then they can get a TRO within days.

It’s not fair that she has to essentially make this her part time job, but it can be an effective option that doesn’t have the side effects of making her look or feel at fault.

It’s incredibly frustrating that the one being wronged has to keep their composure

That’s the exception for me. If the screen is cracked, but it bothers them I sympathize, but if it’s cracked and they throw their phone around and get mad as if it was the phone’s fault then I super, super judge them.

A compressed version of the Shrek movie.

Make it 480p at 18 frames instead of 24, then compress the audio as much as needed, I already know most of the lines.

There is no god, only Shrek.

It’s all Ogre now.

That bear didn’t do anything that was unpredictable, it did what a bear does. I never said a bear wouldn’t maul you, treat it as a bear.

I didn’t say women aren’t unpredictable, that’s a weird take at best, and an argument on a logical fallacy at worst.

I didn’t imply that women can’t be just as evil as men, they absolutely can, because they’re human beings. Same for anybody who’s non-binary, they’re just humans.

I’m sorry that happened to you, nobody deserves abuse.

I don’t understand what you mean by data source. It was an internet trend and some men, not all, got really pissy that some women, not all, chose bear instead of man. A friend explained to me why they might do that and it makes sense, at the end of the day it’s people sharing their opinions, and sometimes trying to understand others opinions helps us understand them better.

I don’t see how it’s sexist, I see no proof, only your opinion based on talking points. Same goes for it being transphobic, it doesn’t make sense to me, please clarify.

If anything this is just a conversation, not proof, your word is worth just as much as mine. We’re just two people sharing our opinions, that’s it.

Tbf a friend had to explain it to me, when the debate went viral at first I was mainly confused. I’m sure when I was younger I would have been one of the men with delicate egos that would find it irrational to not choose a man. It’s actually more thought out and rational when women say bear.

It’s hard to value a face when you’re so used to having two of them.

The question isn’t sexist, it’s emotionally driven, and dismissing it outright is narrow minded. That is what I think is dangerous.

The truth is the question reveals that to most women asked the question, men are unpredictable, and women have to navigate the world that way.

A bear is a bear, it’s always going to do what it does, and you can work around that. Leave it alone and it will leave you alone, even if you have to work hard to avoid it. If you disturb it, it will kill you. It’s predictable.

Men on the other hand are very likely to respect women, maybe even work together. However, there is the small, small, SMALL chance that they will be a terrible person. They could attack, abuse, sexually assault, straight up rape, or even kill the woman; or they could do a disgusting combination of those.

The true root of the question isn’t “do you think a random man is more dangerous than a wild animal?” Of course not.

The real question being put on a social scale is “what’s more predictably dangerous, a random man, or a wild animal?” And the fact that women almost unanimously have the same answer should be commentary enough on how they have to live their lives.

I don’t know why you’re getting downvoted, I had the same thought

1. Trusting YouTube and TikTok over… Hmmm, I don’t know, the US census, US department of Labor, dozens of scholarly studies, hundreds of reputable modern American sociologists, anthropologists, and other educated people who’ve come to a general consensus, seems like a bad start to form an educated opinion.

2. The average human is sorrowfully terrible at understanding scale. “It’s not just a few people, it’s many” is a vague statement. What is many? Compared to what? “Almost 500 THOUSAND cases of cholera were reported last year!! Half a million people!! It’s going to kill us all!!” Yeah, but that’s 0.0000625% of humans. More than twice that many people die from accidents while playing sports for recreation. It doesn’t mean we don’t help people with cholera, and it doesn’t mean we ban sports globally; to use that as an example of a greater issue is just disingenuous or ignorant.

“Many” doesn’t mean most, it doesn’t even mean a considerable percentage. Many could just as easily be an insignificant percentage.

It’s a common thing in many countries. It’s, among other things, a liability issue.

If your “country #1” company does business in “country #2” then what laws apply to them?

In order to distinguish clear lines what “country #2” requires is a representative for the company to be in the country. If the company breaks “country #2”'s laws then the representative is liable for it.

Generally to be a representative you have to have a measurable stake in the transaction, you can’t just be a random Jimbo, so it usually falls to a law firm (or an entity that works with one), mainly because if you need people to help your company follow the law, then they should know the law.

If the company breaks the law, the firm has to deal with that, so it’s a risk for them.

In this case, X needed that representative, either they couldn’t or wouldn’t find one, therefore Brazil said “we can’t hold you accountable to our laws, so get out of our country.”

I’m super, MEGA, oversimplifying, and I’m no expert, but this is my best understanding.

They require a representative in order to establish a chain of responsibility that deals with crime, censorship, social health (lol), public relations, etc.

It does come down to a combination of size, influence, services rendered, and other factors.

He could put a random kid in charge but it would make it worse, like putting a busboy in a chef’s hat during Rush hour.

I mean, you’re being facetious, but no, the law being “your company must have a legal representative to be within our borders”

X was told about it, given a deadline, they missed the deadline, they can’t be in Brazil

Actions have consequences