Or any other rom, really. Stock, which is the Google version of Android, but the pixel line is well supported by lineage and other variants.

No worries :)

Usually a ball cap of some variety, I have a couple.

It was probably my favorite, a custom one a friend got me that has “Mrs Lovett’s meat pies” on it. Custom because my giant dome made the ones that were available from the show itself look ridiculous lol.

There’s also a pride hat, a pirate hat with “surrender the booty” stitched in small print above the back band, a random ebay find with Bacchus on it, and one that’s just plain black.

I’ve got a boonie hat that I use when it’s raining, and a couple of dressier ones that look nice when I have to/should wear a suit.

After my hairline started receding and I got my first sunburn, me and hats became friends lol.

HR isn’t the employees friend, ever.

But that’s where you start the paper trail. It’s really the safest bet

There’s a couple of ways to approach this idea. Literal and figurative.

Within the myth itself, the oldest version has the theft occurring after Zeus banned humanity from having access to fire because of fuckery with sacrifices (that was instigated by Prometheus). So, if taken is the myth is taken literally, it isn’t about whether or not humans could pick up fire that Zeus created via lightning, or other methods, it was about them not being allowed to. By Prometheus giving them fire, he gave them the means to make it themselves rather than it being something the gods owned exclusively.

While that still has the hole that it was basically trying to play games to bypass the command of Zeus rather than giving something humans could have tried to steal on their own, and ignores that fire is a phenomenon of physics and chemistry rather than only being granted by a divine force; it’s still the gist of that original myth as it existed when Hesiod set it down in writing.

Now, I think we all know that the myths weren’t literal at all. There was no Zeus, and lightning wasn’t the only source of fire for humans at all. There’s not much in the way of hard evidence of how humans first harnessed fire, whether it was from external sources like lightning, or lava; or if it was discovered as part of the flint knapping process (little sparks can fly under the right circumstances), or other options.

And it isn’t like the Greeks necessarily held every myth to be literal truth. They did have a degree of awareness of myth as symbolism.

And that’s where the figurative comes in.

If your interpret the myth as fire being symbolic of technology, of thought and philosophy, of shifting from hunter-gatherer culture to a more stable location that allows for development of technology faster, then what Prometheus stole wasn’t fire, it was the essence of divinity, the spark that made the gods other than human.

In that respect, you have to understand that Prometheus wasn’t just some rebellious underling. He was a Titan, descended from the oldest gods, just as Zeus was. He was a god of fire, and in some myths was the one that made humans, shaping us from clay. Which is obviously not unique to Greek mythology, but it sets up Prometheus as not only our creator, but our champion among the gods and titans.

Indeed, he’s credited in myth with bringing us more than fire. Art and science were credited to him as well.

Taken as a story about our place in the world, and how we exist as thinking beings, Prometheus is our drive to understand the world around us, and fire is our harnessing even the most primal of forces to our wit and will. It becomes a story of humanity being more than reactive, animalistic creatures; of us seeking to understand the world around us in a way that no other animal has been seen to attempt.

That fire is the fire of creation, of science, of poetry and dance and song.

And, it’s also possible to interpret the myth in other ways, but there’s a limit to how much is readable on a screen before the eyes and brain nope out, so I’ll leave it at that.

I will add that most libraries will have a copy of Bulfinch’s mythology. It isn’t necessarily a perfect source on Greek myths, but it does a good job at being as complete as possible at the time it was written, and doing so in accessible terms. With it being the default text for a very long time, it’s also ubiquitous. Even if your library doesn’t have a copy, there’s project Gutenberg, and you can find torrents or other file sharing sources for it, for free. Amazon usually has free versions of it available too, though I haven’t looked in a while.

I thought I was on metalmemes for a second lol.

Yeah, it’s now a term that people request they be referred to as by others, not just in group.

How do you determine when to call for proof or not?

It could have “during a discussion” at the end, with or without “online” as further clarification

I kinda assumed that it was either a language/translation issue, or trying to find the best way to express it due to some other difficulty.

Not that it matters really, but it does mean that it’s difficult to be certain we’re answering the right question

But what about indole? Nobody ever gives credit to indole

There’s a part in a discworld book about a creator “god” obsessed with making beetles lol.

I would have sent them to ds9, at least they have a holodeck there.

I’m not sure what dissection of bodies has to do with drawing external genitalia, but yeah, I suppose social mores would explain away the lack of having seen genitals, and/or drawing them badly.

Well, I was a nurse’s assistant for twenty years, and had female patients in ages ranging from infant to 103. Sometimes, someone poops and you have to get in there and visually confirm everything is clear.

I never once saw vulvae like that. Never have in pornography, erotica, or with sexual partners.

As art it’s fine. Nothing wrong with interpretation of reality. But as an anatomical model, it fails horribly.

For one thing, no clitoral hood. No urethra that I can see. Even assuming the near infinite variety of shapes labia can be, and assuming that a person only has labia as depicted, there’s still a lack of other anatomy that would be easy to visually verify for something intended as an anatomical reference.

Tbh, it looks less realistic than some of the stuff I saw on bathroom walls in high school lol.

Even pictures I’ve seen of genital mutilation, voluntary body modification, and post surgical results don’t look like that.

I think the closest I’ve seen was post labiaplasty, when everything was still swollen enough the lady couldn’t close her legs without pain.

I just don’t believe the artist used any model at all.

Sugar free, but are they artificially sweetened?

Edit: nvm, I should have just explained rather than asking and not waste your time, my apologies.

Reason I asked is that while nothing in those flavor packets spoils in a way that will harm you, nor break down into something that could, they may well taste unpleasant.

Artificial sweeteners in particular kinda get “stale”, unless stored completely air free. They lose sweetness, and if the other chemicals are mixed with the sweetness in mind, it might not be enjoyable.

But there’s no actual expiration date on any of the brands or their components that I’ve ever seen. Best by dates aren’t the same thing as expiration dates (which you probably already knew, but figured I’d mention it anyway).

Worst case, it tastes like crap, unless the package has been damaged enough for moisture to get in. If the packet is intact, you’re good to go. Otherwise trash it

Pfft, everyone knows pee is stored in the scrotum

Okay, okay, I can get the internal structures being an unknown.

But damn, could they not have found someone willing to show the artist their cooch? That’s the one part that you don’t have to cut someone open to know what it looks like. I mean, you can, but it’s totally optional, and much messier.

Point is, they could have found some way to trick someone into being a model. Like, “hello ma’am, your shoes are unbuttoned”, then run around behind them, flip their skirts up and take a peek at the very least.

Can we be real for a minute though?

It’s still better than not having it as an option.

By telegram existing, it diversifies the non private messaging landscape. It’s obviously not better than actually secure and/or private services, but the more options that are out there, the less centralization there is, which is a net positive.

You just have to be aware of its limitations and don’t use it for anything significant. In that regard it’s no worse than something like discord.

You already covered the warnings about not trusting it for privacy or security, so that’s really the beat you can do in informing people. Once you’ve done your due diligence for the people you care about, you gotta let them do what they’re gonna do. It’s either that or go hard and refuse to communicate on anything other than the services you deem best for your preferences and hope for the best

Millions.

And what’s hilarious is that I know so many people that also enjoy the band that it would be losing very little.

That title is word salad, but if I’m reading everything in the text right, it looks like you’re asking when proof is expected to be provided when asked for.

It could be you’re asking when we would ask for proof before considering the other person to be acting in good faith.

It doesn’t matter much which one it is, since the answer from my end is essentially the same thing, but if it isn’t one of those, my response might be different, and thus make this comment off topic unintentionally.

For me, the tipping point is more about a combination of claims and import. The less important it is, the more unbelievable the claims can be before I call shenanigans and want proof if I’m going to continue interacting with someone.

The inverse is true as well. A very important subject, and the less incredible the claims can be before I nope out without proof.

The key is that it’s about the time I’m willing to spend entertaining a discussion.

If I’m confident enough that the person is full of shit, I’m not engaging at all, unless what they’re saying could fuck up someone else’s life in some way. If that’s the case, I don’t engage, but I’ll provide whatever information I have and nope out.

In your example, the claim to be from a low population location is so low importance that IDGAF. The only time that would matter to me is if they’re making claims of authority because of it. Even then, as long as what they’re claiming is consistent with fact that can be looked up, I ain’t got the time to try and pry them out of their story.

There’s also a limit to what kind of proof is acceptable to ask for. Which doesn’t apply to your example, what with them claiming a specific location, but in general, nobody has to dox themselves to satisfy me, so I’ll disengage if I really believe they’re full of shit rather than go there.

I’ll never ask someone for a picture of themselves or any identifying features. It just isn’t acceptable to ask for.

See, there’s a bit of leeway necessary for a semi-anonymous forum to function. You assume the best until something stops that possibility. In the example you gave, one of you brought up “els syndrome” (which isn’t something I’m aware of, and it didn’t come up with a description or other information on a quick search)

If someone is making claims to have a medical condition, and the conversation doesn’t veer into claims of medical fact, I’m perfectly willing to accept their experiences as lived and not care if that matches with other people’s lived experiences. It just doesn’t matter on a partially anonymous forum. It’s the same kind of suspension of disbelief that’s necessary to take anyone’s story at face value. Until and unless their personal experience reaches something known to be false, it isn’t something that matters for having a nice conversation.

If they start claiming that drinking apple cider vinegar cured their AIDS, we got a problem. That’s where things start getting dangerous to others that nighty come along later.

Are those examples enough to get my viewpoint? I don’t wanna belabor the point if it’s clear enough.

Why does it matter at all? Well, there has to be a balance between healthy skepticism and giving people room to express themselves. We should all, always carry a kernel of doubt with us regarding any claims. But we also should always “remember the human”. None of it will achieve both of those perfectly, but that’s the goal.

If the other person is lying out their ass, does it matter? Does the interaction lose value because they’re making things up? I say it doesn’t inherently do so. If I interact with this post of yours, but it turns out you made it all up, it doesn’t devalue the interaction for either of us.

So the balance of this thread is about people expressing something that’s largely internal. If you felt the need to fake the posted conversation snippets, it still expressed something true in you, regardless of objective reality. We, as people, can still have valuable interaction over fiction. You making it up would not have any impact on the value I have/get in my response.

Your examples don’t meet the criteria for proof in my mind. You had what looks to be an interesting conversation with someone. That’s the primary thing, imo. Was the human interaction worth the time put in?

I will as soon as gooses stop invading the lower 48.

Meese are the armored division of the Canadian invasion. The gooses and meese are a menace