It says “Jet fuel doesn’t melt steel beams.” Which is true depending on the beam, but the steel beams in the WTC didn’t need to melt to fail. They just needed to be heated up to a point their yeild strength is lower than the weight of the building above it and physics takes over from there.

Honestly my first thought when I saw this was that it had to be some type of homemade tool for car repairs. Car mechanics will make a tool out of anything if it gets the job done.

I was a cashier at a department store decades ago, the answer is no. When I started I’d judge people on their purchases, after a few shifts I couldn’t care or remember anything anyone got.

The misunderstanding isn’t yours, it’s the general publics understanding of the legal system and it’s processes. Which has been misinformed by decades of American criminal dramas like Law and Order, CSI, and NCIS. No one in this thread will go to rich people court like Trump gets to, we all get regular court if we get the privileged right to a court date. So when misinformed Trump supporters hear the judge ruled from the bench they see an overreach. When Trump’s legal team presented such a bad defense and showed a complete disregard for the court and it’s ruling in their opinion it wasn’t his team who did a bad job, but a judge who never gave him a chance.

You’re right, I was careless. It wasn’t a strawman though. It’s still a generalization or informality fallacy. If you’re going to head in so hot at least have use the right terms.

You’re wrong, I didn’t talk about dangers and I didn’t put up a strawman. If you wanted to pin a logical fallacy on my argument you should have said I made a generalization fallacy or an informally fallacy because I was so vague. It’s actually pretty telling that you’re attributing a lot of intention where there was none. I am not going to spend the time or energy to make a legitimate argument with some random jerk on the internet that ultimately just gets us Internet points. I have more important things to do with my time.

And honestly my only reason for posting is to make the comment number go up one tick to keep these communities going. I really don’t care about what you think and unless you’re in a position of power no one else does either.

Edit: I’ll downvote myself, I don’t approve of anyone behaving like either of us.

Maybe I shouldn’t step in this but here it goes. My personal opinion is that nuclear isn’t good or bad, it’s an option that’s available. I have never heard a nuclear activist say that nuclear energy is superior to renewables. It’s not black and white, it’s all a complex mix of demands and limitations that dictate if renewables are better for an area or nuclear. It’s a whole lot of gray, but nuclear energy isn’t as dangerous as some make it out to be.

Unfortunately yes. This story by NPR isn’t an academic source but it’s definitely worth listening to. On average bug populations have declined by 2% a year for decades or more in some areas, less in others. It’s an average.

Now truthfully, whether or not a declining bug population is the main cause of fewer bugs on our windshields or if it’s better aerodynamics I don’t know. What I do know is a more aerodynamic vehicle isn’t something I need to worry about, a declining bug population is.

It’s two things, one personal vehicles are designed to bend air around them rather than slice through or just brute force through air resistance. This means that more bugs are pushed out of the way with newer vehicles now, compared to older vehicles which just had the bug hit the windshield. The second and much more impactful reason is because the insect population has dropped significantly in the last 25 years.

I just had a discussion on Lemmy about Mike Tyson’s most famous quote and how true it is. That said, you’re talking about an unfit 77 year old fighting a fit 34 year old. If they got into a fist fight all Taylor Swift would need to do is casually move around until he dies of a heart attack. Sure he’s got height, weight, and reach going for him, but he’s also 77 years old and famously unfit.

I know an url is grammatically correct, but for whatever reason it doesn’t sound right.

Party lines! You’d share your phone line with one or more other households. When the phone rang they all rang with alternating short-long rings to identify which house on the line the caller intended to call. So if someone calls you at 2am, several of your neighbors know about it because their phones rang too. Even better, being a snot nosed kid I knew how to take a set of headphones and clip them onto the line. You’d hear both sides of the conversation of any house on the party line without dropping the call voltage too much and getting caught. That meant no one talked about anything private on the phone, everyone else could be listening.

You’re not wrong, you’re just an asshole.

I don’t think there will be any change in personality or cognition just by using ChatGPT. The only concern I can think of is over reliance. Especially if your child intends to goto post secondary school. Universities are very strict regarding plagiarism and view AI generation as such. If they can use it responsibly there no downside, if they’re going to use it to start to do their homework for them it’ll be a problem.

Some personal experience: I’ve trained a little, I’m not a professional fighter. All my very few fights have been street fights. I’ve been trained how to takedown but I can’t find enough thought to actually do it fight. The absolute best thinking I’ve ever done in a fight was remembering my boxing hits and even that was more of a flash than a rational thought. Honestly the thought “RUN!” comes up more often in a fight for me than anything actually useful to fight.

I have taken Mike’s advice into every fight I’ve been in. No amount of armchair training can prepare you for when your adrenaline really hits.