I WAS THE FIRST TO ADD A 9 TO A C NOW EVERY ACOUSTIC COVER FROM 1988 TO 2004 OWES ME $6
Solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short
I WAS THE FIRST TO ADD A 9 TO A C NOW EVERY ACOUSTIC COVER FROM 1988 TO 2004 OWES ME $6
Sexual assault victims have a time limit. Copyright infringement “victims” do not. Tracks.
are you american?
I’m just trying to establish conditions by which we all might agree that this is worth looking into before they happen. It’s easy to try to play connect the dots with the stars, there are a bunch of them already and you can just ignore the ones that don’t make the picture you want. I’m trying to add predictions to this theory in the name of the scientific method - if another whistleblower dies before his testimony is complete, that will be beyond what I can dismiss as coincidence.
Okay, but in the interest of not pretending that They Would Never™ can we all agree that if a THIRD whistleblower dies shortly before or during testimony that maybe something is happening here? You have the guy who committed suicide in the middle of depositions after telling his friend “If I commit suicide, no I absolutely did not” and now the healthy 45 year old who all of a sudden has multiple infections and a stroke. Is there a point at which you’d accept the idea that it’s a bit beyond coincidence that the deadliest place in the world seems to be the witness stand at a trial where Boeing is the defendant?
I mean, suiciding the guy who flat out told his friends “If I commit suicide no I didn’t” shows that agent 747 was due to update his techniques and understanding.
each member of the class is gonna get the cash value of 2 oz beer * number of short beers they bought * .6 (assuming 40% attorneys fees). Nobody’s retiring off this money.
a fat check.
idk how much he’ll actually get considering his damages are a couple ounces of beer.
bizarre restrictions around background play
there’s nothing bizarre about it - the free version is shitty on purpose
we’re talking about the mods on lemmy.ml, not the cuban government
as with every bad idea, my guess is that they just shouted the word “freedom” over and over again
Bet I can tell you something about the voting history of the guy who couldn’t understand basic math or the concept of a sale, perseverated on that fact long enough to come back to the burger king that tried to give him a deal, called the cashier a racial slur and pulled out a gun.
HABEMUS PUPPER!
Putting out a product that’s offensively bad in a limited run, selling a bunch of it real quick for the novelty value and then discontinuing it is a pretty tried and true strategy. We’re here talking about it right now, and a certain percentage of us are gonna hear about it and think “That’s so terrible that I have to try it just so I know how terrible it is.” If you can accurately gauge the number of people who are willing to buy something bad just to have a novel experience you can make money selling glizzygulps.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/25/nyregion/trump-bond-reduced.html
He’s God’s Most Special Guy, so he gets yet another exception to the law. Courts have ruled that he has to put up less than half of what would be required of anyone else.
don’t worry, a judge just ruled that Don is a special boy and doesn’t have to follow the same laws as everyone else so he doesn’t need to put up the whole bond.
everything about my life changed when I realized that if something tastes like it needs salt but adding salt doesn’t help, it needs acid.
I feel like it’s context-dependent, though. It’s hard to argue that a pen in your head/jaw/neck does not have the potential to kill you.
take note urban planners: even in the sky, trains work better
I love this thing where buying something has been replaced by buying an alterable, revokable license to access that thing. It lowers costs and adds flexibility for producers, which allows them to save money, and they pass that savings on to me in the form of higher prices and my shit that I paid real fucking money for just disappearing one day. Then they explain that I never really “owned” it despite the fact that they use the word “own” in the marketing material, because it’s also legal to use words that have known definitions in agreements and then later explain that you were actually using an entirely different, secret definition of that word that’s actually the opposite of what you very purposefully implied.