I’m just now realizing how much I’d kill for cotton candy with the handle of Mjölnir as the stick.

“Welcome to the final problem.”

I thought the joke was that the microphone was a little flaccid so he had to give it some stimulation to make it long again?

1970s αrrtade*

FTFY

I just want to go off-script for a second and say that I’m so fucking happy this meme format has stood the test of time.

That’s an excellent observation. Meanwhile, we’ve seen Trump skillfully deepthroating Purtin’s ween time and again since 2016. It’s clear he’s the man for the job.

It’s a long read, but it’s a damn good one.

• “We are open.”
• “We open are.”
• “Are we open?”
• “Are open we?”
• “Open, we are.”
• “Open are we.”

So 2/3 of these permutations actually make sense.

My brain didn’t read “labradoodles” as part of a proper noun for a second, and my brain tripped up the stairs picturing a bunch of actual labradoodles doing this.

Seriously fucked up, though; puppy mills are a scourge.

$20 decillion isn’t just more money than exists. The amount of money that exists is a rounding error of a rounding error of a dozen more nested rounding errors compared to $20 decillion. The nominal GDP in 2022 was $100 trillion (and even then, calling this “all the money that exists” is a wonky metric). For comparison, $2 undecillion is only 100x more than $20 decillion. So while looking at this XKCD, just chop off two zeroes from the $2 undecillion figure, and boom.

Jellyfish are cnidarians, a phylum which also includes corals and sea anemones. Jellyfish are a specific lifecycle stage of medusozoans (their own subphylum), while corals and sea anemones are anthozoans (another subphylum of Cnidaria).

So yup, they are polyps before sexual maturity. And you’ll find they’re more closely related to corals than they are to members of any other phylum.

Edit: I highly recommend that anyone who wants to get lost in the world of marine invertebrates check out WoRMS and then follow along in parallel on Wikipedia as you navigate the tree.

I’d be more than happy to pin a post about Measure J if you’d like to create one.

I would also like to point out – as I know land animals often get all the attention – that Trump wants to dismantle the NOAA. Under the NOAA is the National Ocean Service, and one of their primary tasks is the conservation of the US’ coasts and lakes. It’s not just the humans and the other land animals who are in grave danger from a Trump administration; it’s the trillions of creatures living within and outside of the US’ waters. It’s every animal except for a select few rich, corrupt, fascist humans who will be placed in danger by a Trump presidency.

You can check officially if you’re registered to vote here.

Having a 0 as the condition for a ternary operator seems redundant.

The first letter submitted to the Ouija chain is sacred, and we must respect @kiljoy@lemmy.dbzer0.com’s contribution.

Trained solely on HowToBasic’s emails.

Honestly, in hindsight, the variability was the most fun part of Halloween. Every kid knows they could just as easily ask their parents for $10 and get a bag of candy bars, but it’s ultimately the variety of what I could be getting and the unpredictability that made me excited. Was there sometimes weird shit I didn’t like? Sure, but probably just as often, there was some weird shit I did like that other kids probably didn’t, so I think it evens out. There were definitely kids out there who were jazzed to get black licorice, or there were some parents that were jazzed to get a small treat on the side after a night of escorting their kid(s) around since their kid(s) didn’t want it.

I think giving kids weird shit on Halloween as long as it’s safe, edible, and reasonably palatable is pretty cool tbh and should be encouraged. Like I still remember one house gave out little baggies of Goldfish crackers, or I think another gave out apple slices. One gave out huge sour candy strips. Like I think the best Halloween is one where there’s a foundation of “regular” treats with maybe about 25% oddballs sprinkled in.

A

deleted by creator

Incidentally, we try not to use these sorts of “Forbes contributor” articles on Wikipedia when possible. They’re effectively just blogs masquerading under the credibility of Forbes staff’s actual journalism.

That said, I don’t see anything wrong with this excerpt. This is legitimate attack vector.